范钟鸣在上海学习美术,大学毕业后就去了东京.那个时期他一直作为美术家活跃在艺坛上,以后他有一段时间离开了创作现场.约10年前他回到了上海,不久就又重新开始了他的艺术家创作生涯.从重启艺术创作起直到现在他一直在尝试着绘画.他自己说,约花了三年时间才画出了自己稍觉满意的作品.正因为以上的缘故,他作为美术家在中国还知者不多,所以这次展览虽说不是他的个展,但对他来说,可以说是一次实质性初露头角()的展览.

　　Fan zhongming studied fine art in Shanghai and went to Tokyo after graduation. He's been active since then and left the arena as an artist for a while, 10 years ago he returned and re-embarked his art career in shanghai. Meanwhile he spent 3 years to commence producing something that gratified him. Much to those reason, he was not widely known in China as an artist: for him however, it is essentially an exhibition of “début” rather than a solo.

　　我在这里说他是初露头角(début)还有另一个理由.即,他的作品是一种看遍整个世界也找不到类似尝试的实验作品.在这个意义上,这次的展出作品也属于初露头角(début)的,而非再露头角的作品.而且这些作品甚至应称之为是一种”不可能的尝试”.

　　To have another justification as I defined “debut” here is that he had skimming through world and found his experimental works stands for its own and almost unmatched, in terms of this uniqueness, it should even be called “a trial of the impossible”

　　初看他的”绘画作品”画面,那里好像只有一些彩色蜡笔的污迹,画面里没有画出任何有形的东西,也没有任何夸示油画棒和水彩纸等物质特性的画面肌理,更没有属于概念主义(Conceptualism)的意味.确切地说,他故意不画有形的东西(包括线条),而且也有意识地要避开那种强调材料物质性或主张艺术概念(乃至观念)的、将艺术特殊化、纯化的做法.从欧美的近、现代美术常识来说,这样做是不可能实现绘画的.而且,即使以中国现代美术的常识来说,他的如此尝试也毫无疑问地是难以被理解的.

　　At a glance from his works, few but some smudges of crayon left on the surface, with no tangible object or texture manifesting properties of pastel and watercolor-paper, nor anything conceptual. Precisely, he had deliberately withdrawn distinct shape (including lines) to avoid delivering material properties or anything an indication of conceptualism: metamorphosis or purification of art. It is impossible for the West or contemporaries to implement similarly, certainly beyond comprehension even for his peers in China.

　　那他到底在做着什么样的尝试呢?非常明显的是,我们首先必须放弃那种”这幅画画的是什么(实体)”的看画方法.其次,对于观者来说这里有两条线索可以帮助你去理解他的作品.那就是绘画上的深度和他使用的水彩纸纸纹.

　　So why is such attempt? Firstly, we need to think outside of the box: “what is the subject (entity)of it?” Secondly, there’re two threads guiding viewers to his works: “Deepness” of the pieces and texture of watercolor-paper.

　　我先从第二条线索入手吧.绘画不可能画在空中,它必须画在某种载体(Supporter)上,而且需要某种颜料(或相当于颜料的东西).我想,或许范钟鸣需要的绘画载体和颜料是某种能尽可能减弱画材物质性的组合.为什么呢?后面你会明白.

　　Let’s start from the second thread: a drawing could not hover in a space without clinging to a “supporter” and pigment (or things equivalent). I guess it was which weakens the material properties that Fan desired, perhaps. But why? You would found out later.

　　Painting could not paint on air space,it must paint on some “supporeter”with some pigment

　　就绘画载体而言,西洋画纸要比油画布以及和纸(中国宣纸)更合适,因为它们在物质性上是最为中性的.拿绘画颜料来说,非油彩、水彩、水粉的颜料更好,但也不能是墨或铅笔,因为墨的物质性较强,与东方绘画传统的联系也太紧密,铅笔会容易被误读为素描而非绘画,如果铅笔使用过重也会突显出它的物质性来.基于这样的考虑才会有这里的水彩纸和油画棒的组合,这个组合可以让绘画从材料的物质性中解脱出来.

　　Sketching paper is more appropriate than canvas or rice paper for a “supporter” since it’s more neutral. Pigment could be oil/ water based or gouache, but not ink nor pencil, due to strong materiality of ink which correlates Eastern tradition too well; Pencil would be interpreted as anything sketch-like but a painting, or exposed materiality if overused. So watercolor paper and oil pastel become a combination and break free from such constraint.

　　但是,不,而且,这里的”纸纹”,这个最低限度的纸张物质特性竟成了他绘画的切入口.就是说,他并非要去画实体性的”什么”而要以”纸纹”为中心去展开他的”绘画”行为. 请你仔细观看他作品上的”纸纹”,他的绘画好像在尽可能地避免让这些”纹”在画面中突显,因为如果突显的话,那里会形成较强物质性,会损害他的作品. 他在一边利用纸张的纹路画画,一边又要抑制住这些纹路的物质性主张.应该说他就是这么画画的.由此看来他既没有画什么,也没有去夸示绘画颜料和载体的物质特性,这几乎与”不画”没什么差别.这明明在画却又不像在画的绘画作品,在某种意义上说是属于极为精神性的东西.

　　But no, this minimal materiality of paper is nevertheless the starting point of his work. It means he is not composing anything substantial but to carry out behavior of “painting” from the “paper veins”. Please observe it close and carefully: the pigment refrains from merging above “texture” which otherwise ruins it by emphasizing the materiality. It is the texture that he’s working on meantime its physical performance has been restrained. Therefore he neither attempts to specify anything nor to exaggerate properties of the supporter or pigment, it makes few differences from “not to paint” and hardly be categorized as a painting, but in a way it’s highly spiritual.

　　我现在来谈第一个线索, 刚才我不由自主地说出了”精神性”的结论,其实那个”精神性”是”感觉性”的,或说是与人的感觉相关的.你不妨站在他的画作前去感受一下画面里的”深度”感.因为从”画什么”的意味上来说,其实,范钟鸣在画的是某种”深度”.

　　Now here’s the first thread, it is spiritual that I spontaneously concluded, by which I mean it is sensual, or something associated with one’s feeling(or sensation?. If you stand in front of his work, you could feel the “depth” of it, it is the “scope of extent” that makes his work significant.

　　然而,这里的”深度”不是绘画透视法的”深度”.这一点是最重要的.曾长期旅居日本的他在那里已对日本和欧美的美术历史和理念非常熟悉和理解.如今他要表现的深度是西洋绘画透视法所无法表现的深度,而且也是中国传统绘画所不能表现、或不能充分表现的深度,或叫做”感觉性的深度”.

　　However, this “depth” is not by anyway relates to Perspective. This is most important. Had long lived in Japan, he’s very familiar with art history and philosophy in both Japan and the West. He’s aiming to reveal which none of the Westerners’ perspective drawers and Chinese traditions could have done or done sufficiently: a “sensual expanse”.

　　在这仅是一个平面的画面上他要让空气流动起来,而且不仅向前后流动,还向左右方向流动,他要在这里营造出一种正在向四面八方流动的深度感. 更进一步说,虽说观者是通过眼睛(视觉器官)来看它们,但它们会给与观者一种超越视觉感受(幻象)的、贯通你整个身体的深度感觉.他所谓的深度可以说是一种空间、抑或是一个世界的广度.那不仅仅是绘画的空间,那是我们在平日生活的现实世界中能感受到的、可以呼吸到它空气流动的某种”广度”空间.他要去表现他们,要直接去表现它们,这已不是在画什么了,而是在”实现”什么了.为什么这么说呢?因为”它们”是无法被描绘出来的.在西洋绘画里或在更广义的绘画里虽不能说如此的尝试完全没有,但可以说那些曾有过的尝试都不曾直接去表现这个广度,而是通过描绘某种眼睛可见的、在这个广度里存在的实体物来间接地表现它们.

　　He wants air flowing on this very bare surface, not only back and forth but also left to right. He wants to create magnitude as it flows from all directions. Furthermore, even viewers see it via retina (eyes), it indeed brings illusions which exceed physical visions (visual organs), a deep sense penetrating your bodies. This deepness could be deciphered as a perimeter in a space or a world: a place we can feel or breathe in daily life. If he wants to disclose it, he could not paint but to “actualize” it. Why? considering it’s indescribable. One could not say there’s never been any consonant undertake since Western art or a broader sense, but even there is, they’re depicting a visible entity to demonstrate the depth, rather goes directly into it.

　　之所以说范钟鸣的尝试是没有前例的,因为他要将这种”广度本身”不通过任何描绘而直接实现出来.怎么做才能超越至今为止的绘画概念呢?在这些概念之外还可以有怎样的美术表现呢?范钟鸣现在的绘画就是一个具有挑战性的回答!你如果想要”画什么”的绘画,那就只可能是既成的绘画,只有当你彻底什么有形的东西也不画时新的绘画才有可能出现.

　　The reason why Fan’s work is unprecedented is that he intends to represent the “magnitude (span)” directly without portraying a thing. How to surpass existing art concept, is there any other way to articulate it besides those? It’s a challenging answer Fan offers: it’s a de facto if you want to paint something, only if you thoroughly abolishing to paint could that be merging a new one.

　　如此的几乎什么有形的东西也不画的绘画可以说至今不曾有过.比如卡西米尔•马列维奇(Kasimier Malevich),他的什么实体物也不画的《白色正方形上的黑色正方形》,实际上也是在正方形的画布上涂(画)上白色,再在白色块上画上了黑色的正方形.再比如马克•罗斯科(Mark Rothko)的绘画作品,不管它们是单色的还是重色的,它们都是在画面上用颜色涂抹出来的或画出来的色彩空间.画家以此来传达他空间感觉.相比之下,范钟鸣采取的却是”不画而直接去实现”的方法.因为只要去画就一定会去画”什么”东西,这对他来说是不能算画出了或实现出了”什么”东西的.

　　Such way is almost unparalleled throughout art history. Kasimier Malevich for instance, he draw no concrete object in “black square over white square”, but he painted white over squared canvas and black one over the white. Another example Mark Rothko, no matter monochrome or colored, he always conveys a sense of space on canvas by brushing using pigment. In contrast, Fan purposefully not to paint but to show it directly instead. It could not have been completed if it was drawn as “something”.

　　“不画而直接去实现”——西洋人,或者以西洋式思考方式思考美术的人们也许会说这是一种”极简主义”.但是,比如这次出展作品中的大幅作品,他在创作上花费了3个月的时间,所以应该说它们是充分画过了的绘画作品.充分画过了可却什么有形的东西也没画!所以才需要时间、才需要很长的时间.好像在画什么东西可又什么东西也没画!如此的绘画作为在画面里实现出了一种”广度”.与其说那是在表现它们还不如说是在把它们直接叫入到画面里来.

　　“Do not paint but to implement” – Westerners or those mind alike would probably interpret it as “minimalism”, but he spend 3 months to complete some of his exhibition works. As a result, they are said to be done with full grade, Full to nothing tangible, it requires time, a long time to be completed. Something has been delivered yet apparently there is none to be perceived. It is the very force that called you immediately on your face with a “wideness” to be emerged.

　　站在他的如此作品前,一段时间后你就会感受到这种”广度”和”深度”了.确实有点不可思议之感.”一段时间后”才会发生,这是不可思议的.一般的绘画作品,它们的深度和广度是在画面进入眼睛的瞬间就能感到的,而他的作品却似乎有什么不一样.这应该怎么来表述呢?

　　You could “seize the dimension” after standing before his works, it’s amazing, but only “after a while”: this very “time-lap” is thought to be more amazing. For other works, their depth and breadth could be felt instantly after being looked at, but these are different. How may I elaborate it further?

　　我暂且这么表述吧——他作品的深度和广度是渐渐地强烈起来的,它们慢慢地渗透到了我内部,比起空间性的、视觉性的感觉来说,精神性的感受更为强烈.稍微夸张一点说,它们首先就直接冲击着我的精神,其后才轮到我的视觉.这是一种让视觉不舒服的事情.我的眼睛好像有点不高兴,可同时我的眼睛又不由分说地被强拖到了我的精神里.眼睛在精神或者”心”的强迫之下去接受它们.

　　Let me put it this way – the capacity in his work is increasingly provoked and slowly permeates through my body, in comparison to a visual sense, it was more of metaphysical: the work impacts on my soul before it does to my eyes. Not much visual comforts to speak of: eyes are not accustomed so it has been dragged into the mental level; they accept it by a compelling force of “mind”.

　　用语言来描述绘画是很困难的.请不要误会我在此所说的”精神”之意,我不想说它们是与”脑”、”知”、”言”紧密相连的东西,在我的意指里,我宁可说它们连接着”心”.在感性(视觉)和知性的对比上我指的并不是”知性”方面,在”知”与”心”之间,我想表达的是更接近”心”的领域.在这个意义上也许直接就用”心”来表述会更好.

　　It is difficult to elucidate: please do not get me wrong by affiliating “mind”, “knowledge”, or ”words” to which i mentioned, I would say they rather connects to “spirit”, it was not something “intellectual” in comparison to perceptual (visual) level. This could have been described more appropriately by saying it closes to “mental” than to the “intellectual” level.

　　不管怎么说,我的眼在看而我的内部、我的”心”却在强烈的反应.此刻在我脑际浮现出了一个疑问.范钟鸣所追求的是感觉还是精神(心)?

　　也许换一种说法更好——在他实现的深度方向的对岸、也即在它们的另一边,也许存在着万物之源的混沌.

　　Anyway, while appreciating it my inner body and heart reacts strongly. At this time I had a question in my mind, what does Fan trying to seek out? Feeling(sensation ?)or spirit (heart)? Perhaps there’s a better alternative to say it, at opposite side of his actualized “depth”, there might be a source of things, a source of everything.

　　译者:范钟鸣